Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part IV: The Usefulness Paradox
- Teva Capitulates to Federal Trade Commission Coercion
- USPTO Issues Memoranda on Subject Matter Eligibility
- USPTO Revokes Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventorship, But Rules Remain Basically the Same
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part III: Eligible Independent Claims Can Have Ineligible Dependent Claims
about
Category: Definiteness
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The metes and bounds of how courts should consider indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) were addressed most recently by the Supreme Court in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 572 U.S. 898 (2014). Regardless, however, of the Court's attempts to properly construe this portion of the Patent Statute (and the…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan – In its recent decision in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. the Federal Circuit reminds us that most verities in patent law are not eternal and are frequently subject to case-by-case interpretation, in this case the purported verity being that reciting the indefinite article ("a") in a patent claim is…
-
By Michael Borella — Self-similarity is a characteristic found in many physical, natural, and human-made systems. In short, it describes a class of structures or behaviors that are at least partially-invariant to time or scale. Thus, these structures or behaviors appear similar in various mathematical ways whether viewed in small or large samples. A well-known class…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed an exclusion order imposed by the International Trade Commission against Bio-Rad for importing infringing microfluidic systems and components used for gene sequencing or related analyses, in Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. Int'l. Trade Comm. The ITC's decision followed a complaint by 10X Genomics, an intervenor…
-
By Michael Borella — Infinity Computer Products ("Infinity") sued Oki Data in the District of Delaware for infringement of four patents. The District Court found the patents invalid due to indefiniteness and the Federal Circuit affirmed. This case serves to illustrate two important points in patent law: (i) taking contradictory positions during prosecution will be…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Indefiniteness under U.S. patent law is a failure to satisfy the statutory requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), which reads: "The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention" (emphasis…
-
By Donald Zuhn — On Tuesday, the Federal Circuit issued a per curiam Order in NZNP Finance Ltd. v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., denying a petition for rehearing en banc filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants HZNP Finance Ltd. and Horizon Therapeutics USA, Inc. The Court also denied Plaintiffs-Appellants a panel rehearing. Circuit Judge Lourie, joined by Circuit…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit earlier this week affirmed a District Court's decision invalidating almost all of the claims asserted against an ANDA filer, in HZNP Medicines LLC v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. Nevertheless, because a claim was held invalid and infringed, the proposed generic compound is delayed from coming to market.…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed decisions from four separate trials in the District of Delaware involving seven different defendants regarding validity and infringement of patents directed to an opioid addiction treatment in Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, S.A. The case arose in ANDA litigation over Indivior's suboxone film…
-
When the PTAB Attacks! By Andrew Williams — In the past few years, the public's perception of the patent system in the United States has been at a low point. One of the causes of this lack of confidence in the system has been the increase in abusive patent litigation from entities that have been…
Patent Docs 